<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2015 (1) TMI 559 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255360</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal, directing the exclusion of certain companies based on the turnover filter and functional dissimilarity. Additionally, the Tribunal adjusted the computation of deduction under Section 10A as per the jurisdictional High Court&#039;s decision. The decision underscores the significance of consistent application of filters and functional comparability in determining the Arm&#039;s Length Price (ALP).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Jan 2015 13:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=373939" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (1) TMI 559 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255360</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal, directing the exclusion of certain companies based on the turnover filter and functional dissimilarity. Additionally, the Tribunal adjusted the computation of deduction under Section 10A as per the jurisdictional High Court&#039;s decision. The decision underscores the significance of consistent application of filters and functional comparability in determining the Arm&#039;s Length Price (ALP).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255360</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>